What I find curious is the amount of data that has to be processed.
Suppose you have 1,000 data sources around the world and you take the high and low every day, that is:
1,000 * 365 * 2 = 730,000 data points per year.
So if there are more locations with more than two measurements per day then the amount of data skyrockets.
So even if the data is being tampered with, how can you know without being one of the people doing the tampering?
Maybe they tampered with a Walgreen's sign I saw last summer showing 104 degrees.
psik
Yup, that's where the big buck are going, they sure as heck aren't going to scientist's pockets!
Workers begin the assembly of Cray XT6 system, the first phase of NOAA’s supercomputer to be used for climate research.
The 14 Cray XT6 cabinets, comprising the first phase of NOAA’s supercomputing system to be used exclusively for climate research, arrived at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in recent days and have now been assembled. The initial system will have a peak capability of 260 teraflops (260 trillion calculations per second), but next year the system will be expanded and upgraded to 1.1 peraflops.
ORNL photos/Curtis Boles & Jason Richards
climate2.jpg
http://knoxblogs.com/atomiccity/2010/07/20/noaas_supercomputer_arrives_at_1/
Then the problem should be reviewed and looked into by a third party.
You act as if this sort of data is kept secret. Oh yeah that's what your right-wing sources keep feeding your people. Well that's pure bullshit.
The data has been public from the gitgo and many many third and forth and fifth parties have accessed the data for many different reasons.
Have at it: https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/argo/
Global Argo Data Repositoryhttps://www.nodc.noaa.gov/argo/
IMPORTANT NOTICES:
— 5 January 2015: The monthly archives of the original Argo data are available at: ftp://ftp.nodc.noaa.gov/nodc/archive/arc0022/0042682
— 29 April 2014: Argo data made available through the repository is a translation of original Argo with the global attributes section of the Argo NetCDF format ehnanced. The contents of the Argo data including orginal quality flags are preserved. (Read More...)
For the master source of Argo data and information, visit:
The Argo Project Office
JCOMMOPS Argo Information Center
French Coriolis Server
US GODAE Server
Objectives
GADR Home
What's New
Overview
Argo Basins Data
Argo Floats Data
Argo DACs Data
List of Grey Floats
File Naming Conventions
Maintain authoritative reference version of original operational oceanographic data and information.
Provide high quality data to a wide variety of users in a timely and useful manner.
____________________
Never heard of the Argo before. It is twenty years newer than the date I am talking about. But, it sounds like better technicality and more practical. As far as right wing secret bullshit. Did you not state earlier that data has to be translated by experts before it is readable? The site you posted was out of service and could not be reached.
You act as if this sort of data is kept secret. Oh yeah that's what your right-wing sources keep feeding your people. Well that's pure bullshit.
Your statement is false and you blamed it on the right-wing. You are going over the edge. How can someone I remember talking to about gathering climate data 40 years ago be contributed to a right-wing conspiracy today? It makes no logical sense.
Here is what does make logical sense about your statements.
Former Obama EPA Chief Concedes: ‘Climate Change Has Become A Religion’
http://nation.foxnews.com/2017/02/10/former-obama-epa-chief-concedes-climate-change-has-become-religion
You act as if this sort of data is kept secret. Oh yeah that's what your right-wing sources keep feeding your people. Well that's pure bullshit.
Your statement is false and you blamed it on the right-wing. You are going over the edge. How can someone I remember talking to about gathering climate data 40 years ago be contributed to a right-wing conspiracy today? It makes no logical sense.
Here is what does make logical sense about your statements.
Former Obama EPA Chief Concedes: ‘Climate Change Has Become A Religion’
http://nation.foxnews.com/2017/02/10/former-obama-epa-chief-concedes-climate-change-has-become-religion
Amazing, you are. :roll:
A) I believe I made clear that your memory fails you - 40 years ago there were no buoys that dove down to gather salinity and temperature data.
As for the challenge of calibrating between weather buoys and ship gathered data 40 years ago a look at google scholar shows that there were plenty of studies and that this exceedingly difficult task has been occurring in the "public" though accessible only by people who have the education and training to understand these very difficult mathematics.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=20&q=Calibrating+weather+bouys+and+ship+temp+readings-&hl=en&as_sdt=0,6
for example:
"Fitting of satellite and in"situ ocean surface temperatures: Results for Polymode during the winter of 1977–1978"
That's just one title you can find in this pages long list.
You are the one sucking on the Delusion Lollipop.
B) My response was in response to your paranoid wording
If this is the data they are talking about that was not use and replaced with ships surface data. Then the problem should be reviewed and looked into by a third party.
What are you talking about? Stop tossing out non-sequiturs.
Also sounds like you are mixing up weather buoys with ARGO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_buoy
C) Did you even take the time to listen to what she said? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IukxuQv3QBk
It's Republican climate science contrarians with their contorted logic and utterly dishonest representation of what scientists are telling us and what the science and
earth observations are showing us who are the religious fanatics.
Hell they are even the ones who think they understand god and his will, that's truly lunatic thinking there. Shit many think the Earth could be 6,000 years old. Of course such minds are clueless about our planet and it's biosphere and the climate system that keeps it humming along. Worst - they refuse to recognize their own fundament ignorance of Earth and the biosphere with it's natural cycles and balances that makes our life possible. They too concerned about petty shit and maximizing profits, while minimize responsibility, pathetic.
But, then Orwellian Doublespeak is the name of the game, ain't it mike.
Did you not state earlier that data has to be translated by experts before it is readable?
I call you silly but I know you are deliberately obtuse. ONLY AN EXPERT WOULD KNOW WHAT THE HELL TO DO WITH THOSE NUMBERS.
Oh but yeah, I remember now.
The TeaParty and neoRepublicans believe that any old dilettante off the street is as good as an educated student and practitioner of the subject.
Like this whole recent meteorologist John Bates' bull pies - the latest on the internet, your post helped me stumble upon,
like I needed another case of bullshit to deal with.
John Bates, takes a highly technical issue, twists and distorts his story to turn himself into a Galilean hero, while casting working scientists as hell bent on deception.
So he weaves his story containing much Writers License and takes it straight to a leading science contrarian blog where he presents his long and technical diatribe to an audience that is in no position to realistically judge the merits of what Bates' sensationalistic and certainly one sided deposition says. If everything he says is true, it's an awful story, then again as more of the story comes out it seems our good Bates is not that honest or accurate in his telling. Of course, that don't matter, the story is out and the astroturfers have a new poster child to plaster everywhere. This audience has already been brainwashed into believing that every scientist is hell bent on committing fraud. The actual truth of the story matters not one wit to them.
These are people too biased and hate filled to give scientists credit for doing their best to get it right. So every story, just like you mikie, starts from a fundamental presumption that all climate scientists can not be trusted and they need regular uninformed citizens deciding how well they are doing their job. Particularly, the ones that report on climate science, Republican assure us they are all liars, don't even have to listen or try to make sense of what those scientists are saying - it's nothing, just ignore it. Nothing but malicious PR all the way down.
And you my dear mike are one of its malicious propagators, you have done your part to help ensure that the coming hell on Earth will roll in fast as possible and as f'n hard hitting as possible. May you taste some of it's horrors first hand, when what you hold dearest flushes away as it is already doing for far too many people on this Earth, may you remember me and imagine my fat middle finger. :blank:
DO NOT BUY THE HOUSE SCIENCE COMMITTEE’S CLAIM THAT SCIENTISTS FAKED DATA UNTIL YOU READ THIS
NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE SUPPORTS THAT NOAA FABRICATED DATA; EVIDENCE STILL POINTS TO CLIMATE CHANGE
By Kendra Pierre-Louis February 6, 2017
http://www.popsci.com/regardless-house-science-committee-claims-noaa-scientists-probably-didnt-manipulate-climate-records
On Sunday February 5th, the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology published a press release alleging, based on questionable evidence,
that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) “manipulated climate records."
The source of their evidence, according to Committee spokesperson Thea McDonalds, was a Daily Mail article. The Daily Mail is a British tabloid most famous for outlandish
headlines such as "Is the Bum the New Side Boob" and "ISIS Chief executioner winning hearts with his rugged looks." This is not the first time that the House Science Committee
has used spurious evidence to dispute the existence of human-driven climate change.
The piece, which quotes John Bates—a scientist who NOAA once employed—challenges the data used in the famous 2015 Karl study. The study, named after Thomas R. Karl—
the director of the NOAA’s Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) and the paper's lead author—was published in Science and debunked the notion of a climate “hiatus" or “cooling."
The House Science Committee press release, which includes quotes from committee Chairman Lamar Smith as well as Darin Lahood (R-Ill) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz), misrepresents a procedural disagreement as proof that human caused climate change is not occurring. It's akin to pointing to a family argument as proof that they aren't actually related. ...
FACTCHECKS 5 February 2017 4:38
Factcheck: Mail on Sunday’s ‘astonishing evidence’ about global temperature rise
https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-mail-sundays-astonishing-evidence-global-temperature-rise
Recent Ocean Warming has been Underestimated
Zeke Hausfather
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnyX32nkYBs
Published on Jan 4, 2017
In a paper published in Science Advances, we used data from
buoys,
satellites, and
Argo floats
to construct separate instrumentally homogenous sea surface temperature records of the past two decades.
We compared them to the old NOAA ERSSTv3b record, the new ERSSTv4 record, the Hadley Centre’s HadSST3 record,
and the Japanese COBE-SST record.
We found a strong and significant cool bias in the old NOAA record, and a more modest (but still significant) cool bias in the
Hadley and Japanese records compared to buoy, satellite, and Argo float data.
The new NOAA record agrees quite well with these instrumentally homogenous records.
'This suggests that the new NOAA record is likely the most accurate sea surface temperature record in recent years,
and should help resolve some of the criticism that accompanied the original NOAA study.'
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/1/e1601207
The need for speed:
Humans are changing climate 170 times faster than nature, say researchers
"Over the past 7,000 years the primary forces driving change have been astronomical - changes in solar intensity and subtle changes in orbital parameters, along with a few volcanoes," Will Steffen, of the Fenner School of Environment and Society and the Climate Change Institute at ANU, said in a statement.
"Human-caused greenhouse gas emissions over the past 45 years have increased the rate of temperature rise to 1.7 degrees Celsius per century, dwarfing the natural background rate," Steffen added.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/13/humans-are-changing-climate-170-times-faster-than-nature-say-researchers.html
7,000 years wouldn't include the Ice Age and that was not man made so I wonder why they don't take a longer view.
psik
The need for speed:
Humans are changing climate 170 times faster than nature, say researchers
"Over the past 7,000 years the primary forces driving change have been astronomical - changes in solar intensity and subtle changes in orbital parameters, along with a few volcanoes," Will Steffen, of the Fenner School of Environment and Society and the Climate Change Institute at ANU, said in a statement.
"Human-caused greenhouse gas emissions over the past 45 years have increased the rate of temperature rise to 1.7 degrees Celsius per century, dwarfing the natural background rate," Steffen added.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/13/humans-are-changing-climate-170-times-faster-than-nature-say-researchers.html
7,000 years wouldn't include the Ice Age and that was not man made so I wonder why they don't take a longer view.
psik
"Over the past 7,000 years the primary forces driving change have been astronomical - changes in solar intensity and subtle changes in orbital parameters, along with a few volcanoes," Will Steffen, of the Fenner School of Environment and Society and the Climate Change Institute at ANU, said in a statement.
"Human-caused greenhouse gas emissions over the past 45 years have increased the rate of temperature rise to 1.7 degrees Celsius per century, dwarfing the natural background rate," Steffen added.
Hmmm, you're right.
Then I started doing a little poking around. I think you need to seek out better news sources .
From the study itself.
The Anthropocene Equation
Owen Gaffney, Will Steffen
First Published February 10, 2017
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2053019616688022
Abstract
The dominant external forces influencing the rate of change of the Earth System have been astronomical and geophysical during the planet’s 4.5-billion-year existence. In the last six decades, anthropogenic forcings have driven exceptionally rapid rates of change in the Earth System.
This new regime can be represented by an ‘Anthropocene equation’, where other forcings tend to zero, and the rate of change under human influence can be estimated. Reducing the risk of leaving the glacial–interglacial limit cycle of the late Quaternary for an uncertain future will require, in the first instance,
the rate of change of the Earth System to become approximately zero.
Hey, and thanks for posting that. Very interesting.
Good article, but did you read the comments? One scientific article about climate change and ignorant deniers start swarming out of the woodwork! It's amaxing how many deliberately stupid and scientifically tin-eared people there are. I know at least one of them and I would forward the article to him but I don't want the comments to add fuel to the fire of his rank stupidity. I really don't get what drives this absolute refusal to accept reality. There have always been stupid people in the world but this is different. They seem to think there is a worldwide conspiracy against them and that they need to defend themselves against it at every opportunity. Anybody have any idea what this stupidity springs from? It seems to be world wide, though the preponderance of run of the mill fools in the United States are outdoing themselves. Can we lay the blame for this only on the country's abysmal level of scientific education? It sounds much more sinister than that. What's behind it?
The accompanying article may shed some light.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/06/trump-world-climate-change-denial
Lois
Here is what does make logical sense about your statements.
Former Obama EPA Chief Concedes: ‘Climate Change Has Become A Religion’
http://nation.foxnews.com/2017/02/10/former-obama-epa-chief-concedes-climate-change-has-become-religion
This is clearly taken out of context: she means that climate change is discussed as if it is a religion. But it isn't: it is hard science. The facts are there: the climate is changing fast, due to emissions of CO2 and methane. This is a scientific fact, not religion.
Here is what does make logical sense about your statements.
Former Obama EPA Chief Concedes: ‘Climate Change Has Become A Religion’
http://nation.foxnews.com/2017/02/10/former-obama-epa-chief-concedes-climate-change-has-become-religion
This is clearly taken out of context: ...
Sadly that doesn't matter to them. All they are concerned about is receiving reassuring words. Facts and physical reality are abstract notions to that mindscape.
Good article, but did you read the comments? One scientific article about climate change and ignorant deniers start swarming out of the woodwork! It's amaxing how many deliberately stupid and scientifically tin-eared people there are. I know at least one of them and I would forward the article to him but I don't want the comments to add fuel to the fire of his rank stupidity. I really don't get what drives this absolute refusal to accept reality. There have always been stupid people in the world but this is different. They seem to think there is a worldwide conspiracy against them and that they need to defend themselves against it at every opportunity. Anybody have any idea what this stupidity springs from? It seems to be world wide, though the preponderance of run of the mill fools in the United States are outdoing themselves. Can we lay the blame for this only on the country's abysmal level of scientific education? It sounds much more sinister than that. What's behind it?
The accompanying article may shed some light.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/06/trump-world-climate-change-denial
Why we’re all everyday climate change deniers
Alice Bell
Lois
Thanks that was a good, if sad, read.
... But there is an even bigger group than any of the above: the rest of us. You probably agree climate change is happening, have maybe even bothered to cut down on how much meat you eat or bunged Greenpeace a quid or two when Russia locked up those Arctic activists. But most of the time you avoid looking global warming in the eye. ...
...In many ways this everyday denial is understandable. Climate change is abstract. We only know about it through vast, complex, global and multi-generational networks of interdisciplinary, highly advanced science. It’s easy for it to drop out of our minds, even if we believe in it. ...
It’s also very scary.
{But she has a happy-ish ending}
... That future is possible. It might even be probable. But it’s not inevitable. We can choose to see climate change, and we can choose to do this before it’s too late. So how can we escape the quagmire of denial? As it turns out, the first step isn’t that hard: just talk about it. To your friends, family, colleagues – even to yourself. By talking about climate change, you’ll make it feel less scary. By talking about it, we’ll unlock solutions. And, crucially, it’s by talking about climate change that we’ll break the silence that allows it to go unnoticed and ignored.
Here is what does make logical sense about your statements.
Former Obama EPA Chief Concedes: ‘Climate Change Has Become A Religion’
http://nation.foxnews.com/2017/02/10/former-obama-epa-chief-concedes-climate-change-has-become-religion
This is clearly taken out of context: she means that climate change is discussed as if it is a religion. But it isn't: it is hard science. The facts are there: the climate is changing fast, due to emissions of CO2 and methane. This is a scientific fact, not religion.
I disagree. I think she had to deal with Climate Change every day and knows a lot about the subject. The context was not about the science or the scientist. It was about the people who crusade the science, the none-scientist. I also think it is a big step to say the person who held such a level of authority in our nation on the subject needs to have her thoughts re-directed. Answer this question, is there a religious movement in Climate Change? There is on this site, that's for sure.
Answer this question, is there a religious movement in Climate Change? There is on this site, that's for sure.
There is a religious movement against the fact that we humans change the climate in a fast rate. And sure, it is on your site: you are one of this movement.
I suspect the “religious” aspect comes from people who are dyed-in-the-wool “capitalists” who are absolutely against anything that might support regulations that might interfere with exploiting the earth to make a buck.
Lois
All in all, the United States has already set more than 2,800 new record high temperatures this month. It has only set 27 record lows.
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/02/should-you-enjoy-the-warm-winters-of-climate-change/517512/
May you live in interesting times. - supposed Chinese curse. A 100 to 1 hoax. :lol:
psik